presentation-xjtlu.utf8
logo

Introduction

Powerpoint

Different opinions about PPT on learning (Amare, 2006; Baker, Goodboy, Bowman, & Wright, 2018; Craig & Amernic, 2006; Hill, Arford, Lubitow, & Smollin, 2012; Jones, 2003).

knitr::include_graphics(file.path(dirname(oldwd), "image/email.png"))
Emails mentioning the use of PPT

Figure 1: Emails mentioning the use of PPT

PowerPoint is “making us stupid, degrading the quality and credibility of our communication, turning us into bores, wasting our colleagues’ time”.

— Edward Tufte (2003)

PowerPoint is still used in over 30 million presentations a day, and PowerPoint software is on 250 million computers. While I do not agree with Tufte that PowerPoint is making us and our students stupid, this case study reveals unpredicted results…Results reveal that while most students say they preferred PowerPoint, performance scores were higher in the sections with the traditional lecture format (teacher at podium, chalkboard, handouts).

— Nicole Amare (2006)

A meta-analysis of 48 studies was conducted to determine if students learn more when taught the same material using PowerPoint compared to traditional instruction. Results revealed that on average, there was no difference in students’ learning based on the type of instruction they received.

— James Baker et al. (2018)

Definitions

Slideshow:

A slide show is a presentation of a series of still images on a projection screen or electronic display device, typically in a prearranged sequence. … A slide show may be a presentation of images purely for their own visual interest or artistic value, sometimes unaccompanied by description or text, or it may be used to clarify or reinforce information, ideas, comments, solutions or suggestions which are presented verbally. Slide shows are sometimes still conducted by a presenter using an apparatus such as a carousel slide projector or an overhead projector, but now the use of an electronic video display device and a computer running presentation software is typical.

— Wikipedia

knitr::include_graphics(file.path(dirname(oldwd), "image/slide-tools.png"))
PPT-like tools

Figure 2: PPT-like tools

Common feature:

  • Pages with landscape view
  • Pagination (page breaks)
  • Bullets
  • Visual effects
knitr::include_graphics(file.path(dirname(oldwd), "image/abuse.png"))
Comments on Zhihu

Figure 3: Comments on Zhihu

Powerpointless (slideware-free) Teaching and Learning (PTL):
Using other tools than PPT-like tools in teaching and learning. These tools include documents, webpages, printouts, white/blackboard writing …

Questions

  1. Would it be more or less effective if we do not use PPT-like materials in class, especially for Post Pandemic Education at XJTLU? (UKPSF A4 K2 K4 K5 V2)

  2. Is there different influence between different disciplines, genders, and grades (years)? (UKPSF A1 K3 V1)

  3. What should we do for improving the teaching and learning in a Powerpointless style in high education (UKPSF A5 K4 V3 K6)?

Methods

Modules

ENV203, A.Y. 2020/2021

  • Statistics for Environmental Scientists
  • Year 3 undergraduates
  • Two disciplines: Environmental Sciences and Bioinformatics
  • HyFlex: approximately 40% online
  • Chinese and international students

DPH206, A.Y. 2020/2021

  • Methods for Analysing Public Health IV: Working in the Field: Data
  • Year 3 undergraduates
  • Public Health
  • Onsite
  • No international student

Actions

  • Online webpages
  • Reading materials (book chapters)
  • White board
  • Printed Handouts
  • Role plays

Survey

  • Questionnaire with 17 questions
    • socio-demographic information
    • attitudes
    • teaching material structure
    • knowledge acquisition
    • motivation
    • open-ended questions
  • Distributed to all the students after the module lectures were completed.
  • Digitized with the software Epi Info 7
  • Analyzed with R.

Results

source("R/read-data.R")
source("R/analyze-data.R")
source("R/visualize-data.R")

Socio-demographic information

  • The total student number: 68
  • 74 % (50 students) filled and returned the questionnaires
  • 5 questionnaires were invalid
  • 45 valid questionnaires, or 66 % of the total class size
figs$pie
Percentage of the students from different disciplines

Figure 4: Percentage of the students from different disciplines

DT::datatable(
  tabs$socio, 
  fillContainer = FALSE,
  # options = list(pageLength = 4), 
  caption = "Table 1. Numbers of samples classified with the socio-demographic information"
)

Overview opinions

  • Means: 0.26 – 0.49
  • Medians: 0.5
  • Peaks: 0.5
  • Positive: 56 % - 76 %
figs$all
Frequency distributions for the scores of the questions in the questinnaire.

Figure 5: Frequency distributions for the scores of the questions in the questinnaire.

Gender

figs$gender_dot

t-test: p values range between 0.09 and 0.69, indicating no difference between female and male.

Disciplines

Difference between BIO, DPH, and ENV?

figs$program_box15

t-test: p values range between 0.42 and 0.96, indicating no difference between BIO and ENV.

Grade

figs$grade_dot

t-test: p values range between 0.03 and 0.52.

  • Minimum p value: Question 8. Were the PTL teaching materials better connected to the learning objectives in an individual lecture?

International

figs$international_box

Discussions

Correlations

figs$cor()

  • Q-05 against Q-10, Q-11, Q-12: Preference from the learning effectivity, understandability, and extended learning.
  • Q-05 against Q-14, Q-11, Q-12: Preference not from the experience of Powerpointless learning.

Advantages

Teaching materials

The teaching materials are more complete, while PPT cuts things apart.

Less decoration. More tightly.

Knowledge acquisition

Better concentrate on what the teacher is talking an showing.

I can follow the instruction step by step. It is detailed enough that if I forget something, I can still find how to do it.

The efficiency and less limitation of copy-paste might be the main advantage, which means it is easier to make notes and review.

I can concentrate on study easily. Class with PPT may be boring because teacher just read PPT content until class finished.

Structure

More logical and coherent than with slides.

Students have more variety materials to understand the learning outcomes

Better structure of content, especially the programming codes, which cannot be well expressed in PPT.

The content is clearly organized. I don’t need spend time on organizing.

Avoid duplicate information (e.g. for PPT, every page needs a title, which may be the same as the previous page)

Love the index at the top of the webpage.

Motivation

Students are more likely to raise their questions in class.

It makes me think more about the knowledge and lecture. It also urge me to learn more by myself.

Disadvantages/suggestions:

It is easier to be distracted. Incontrast, contents in each slide has different concentrations/highlight, which helps me to better understand.

Major points/concepts can be highlighted.

Less visual effect.

The summary of the whole module can have a PPT file to lead us to do the final review.

Conclusions

  1. Students like PTL compared to PPT dominated teaching/learning.
  2. There is no different of the preference on PTL in gender and discipline, while slightly possible difference in grades.
  3. The preference on PTL is from the learning effectivity, understandability, and extended learning rather than from the experience on PPT.

Acknowledgement

The author greatly thank Dr. Linyi Yuan and Dr. Zheng Feei Ma for their kind help in designing the questionnaire.

References

Amare, N. (2006). To slideware or not to slideware: Students’ experiences with powerpoint vs. Lecture. Journal of technical writing and communication, 36(3), 297–308.

Baker, J. P., Goodboy, A. K., Bowman, N. D., & Wright, A. A. (2018). Does teaching with powerpoint increase students’ learning? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 126, 376–387.

Craig, R. J., & Amernic, J. H. (2006). PowerPoint presentation technology and the dynamics of teaching. Innovative higher education, 31(3), 147–160.

Hill, A., Arford, T., Lubitow, A., & Smollin, L. M. (2012). “I’m ambivalent about it” the dilemmas of powerpoint. Teaching Sociology, 40(3), 242–256.

Jones, A. M. (2003). The use and abuse of powerpoint in teaching and learning in the life sciences: A personal overview. Bioscience Education, 2(1), 1–13.

 




A work by true